Reckitt Benckiser India, the maker of Dettol, has filed a plea in the Delhi High Court against dermatologist Dr. Manjot Marwah and social media influencers Raj Shamani and Ritik Chaturvedi. The company alleges that the trio made “false, misleading, disparaging and defamatory” remarks about Dettol Antiseptic Liquid (DAL) in a recent podcast and Instagram content.
URGENT MENTIONING BEFORE THE DELHI HIGH COURT
The matter was brought up for urgent listing on Monday morning and came before Justice Saurabh Banerjee in the afternoon. Despite hearing arguments from Senior Advocate Chander M. Lall for nearly an hour, the court refused to pass an ad interim injunction and instead listed the case for a further hearing at 12:30 PM on April 8, 2025.
Justice Banerjee noted that the defendants had been served notices via email and WhatsApp, and gave them one final opportunity to respond.
“Considering the factual matrix involved as also the (fact that) Defendant-1 (Marwah) claims herself to be a dermatologist and is well aware of the proceedings, one more chance is being given to the defendants to appear at 12:30 PM tomorrow,” the Court said.
CONTROVERSIAL PODCAST AND INSTAGRAM REEL
The case centres around a podcast episode titled “Skin Mistakes You Didn’t Know! Tanning & Sunburn EXPOSED”, released on April 1, 2025, and a subsequent Instagram reel, “Never Use Dettol on your Skin”, posted on April 5, 2025.
In the podcast and reel, Dr. Marwah allegedly referred to Dettol as a “floor cleaning liquid” and claimed it “burns wounds and delays healing.”
Reckitt claims these statements are factually incorrect and defamatory, arguing that Dettol Antiseptic Liquid is a licensed drug meant for use on human skin, and has been sold as such since 1936.
RECKITT’S LEGAL ARGUMENTS
Representing Reckitt, Senior Advocate Chander M. Lall emphasized that Dettol falls under the definition of “drugs” as per Section 3(b)(i) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.
“To call Dettol a disinfectant to be used only for mopping floors is blatantly false and slanderous,” Lall said.
“The reel damages me irreparably even if it’s up for an hour. The podcast can continue, just remove the part that speaks about Dettol,” he added.
He also referred to the Indian Pharmacopoeia, which defines an antiseptic as:
“An agent that inhibits or destroys microorganisms on living tissue including skin, oral cavities, and open wounds.”
According to Lall, the accused content was being used to drive traffic to Marwah’s dermatology clinic and boost viewership for the influencers involved. The podcast reportedly gained 236,000 views and 5,700 likes, while the Instagram Reel surpassed 2.4 million views.
Lall also alleged that Dr. Marwah promoted Betadine over Dettol, saying:
“She claimed Betadine is used in various hospitals instead of Dettol. That amounts to promoting a rival product.”
COURT’S INITIAL OBSERVATIONS
However, Justice Saurabh Banerjee appeared unconvinced by the plea for immediate relief and made an important observation:
“It’s an interpretation given by her, she is a qualified dermatologist,” he said, indicating that the remarks may not qualify as prima facie disparagement.
The judge chose to defer any decision until the next hearing, assuring that:
“I will pass an order one way or the other tomorrow.”
LEGAL REPRESENTATION
Reckitt was represented by:
Senior Advocate Chander M. Lall
Advocate Nancy Roy (Lall and Sethi)
Advocates Jawahar Lal and Meghna Kumar (J-Law)
CONCLUSION
The case raises critical questions about medical professionals’ influence on social media, brand reputation, and the legal boundaries of free expression. All eyes are now on the Delhi High Court’s next move in this high-stakes battle between a legacy brand and influential digital voices.
